Replace airspace with "space". Public figure in a public space. They always want the perks without the cost.
Now, not being harrased is another thing. But not being noticed? (Specially in an airplane) Haters gonna hate.
Epilogue: Yes, any publicity is publicity. I am even considering her AI releases, and the acompaning complains, a public stunt.
What does this mean? Do you mean that she arranged for AI porn of herself to be released?
Isn't that how you turn from a C-lister to a B-lister, not something you do when you're already at the top of the pile?
FWIW, I'm on the side of privacy being an overrated concern. I've been hearing people yammer on about it since the Slashdot days. It's well-tread territory and I've heard every argument in support of privacy on forums like these.
What I don't see very often is an examination of the negative sides of privacy and the positive side of public information. After decades of privacy, dare I say extremism, we have people who would, eg, do away with public records for private property ownership, which seems anthemic to the very notion of a republic.
EDIT: I'm serious, just downvote away, I know that this is an unpopular opinion, but I would appreciate if at least one person engaged in this dialog beyond clicking a button!
OK. "anthemic" does not mean what you think it means.
"anathema" maybe?
In my city, you can go to a website, type the first three characters of a name, and instantly get the full names and addresses of anyone who matches and owns a home.
To my mind, this is beyond absurd. This is a major safety risk with no benefits whatsoever. It's also the #1 reason I continue to rent.
How do you prove you own the land and not the person who is trespassing?
How do you know who to tax?
How do you know who to fine if they dump chemicals in their backyard?
How do you know that everyone is being treated fairly under the law?
And why should the government have privileged information for all of these necessary records for private property?
It's fine that you have found some negative scenarios, but any changes to this practice must address what would be lost!
If you need to sue me for dumping chemicals, you can pretty well be bothered to go down to the clerk and show your own ID. It's not a problem. There is no need for my home address to be searchable by the whole Internet
Put this in the context of the liberal democratic republic as it was born from monarchy: we must leave the “benevolent”, God-graced structure of government behind. In its stead is the common man governing himself, and with all the faults and warts, it is still more conducive to our expected freedoms.
There is not much more of an argument than I can offer other than the hundreds of years of actual practice.
If you feel that way, feel free to explore and examine that. The down votes are most likely because you brought it up without actually examining it.
> After decades of privacy, dare I say extremism, we have people who would, eg, do away with public records for private property ownership, which seems anthemic to the very notion of a republic.
Privacy is popular in HN comments, but the only thing I've seen, in terms of government policy and corporate policy, is a massive all-out-war against the right to privacy.